Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

On:Xbox 360

Riding a tidal wave of controversy, Modern Warfare 2 has been tipped to be the fastest selling video game in history. It has already claimed higher pre-order sales than Grand Theft Auto 4 and it is predicted to sell over ten million copies before this Christmas worldwide. Small wonder considering its predecessor, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare stands in the Guinness World Records for “the Most Played Online Video Game”. Add to this the recent media frenzy over the realistic and violent content in the game. There is no doubt that Activison and developers Infinity Ward have caught people’s attention.

In fact the first thing you encounter when loading up Modern Warfare 2 is a warning message regarding “disturbing and offensive content”. It allows the player to skip potentially squeamish sequences in the game but ensures the player that the storyline and their achievement scores won’t be compromised by doing so. For a first-person shooter with an R18 rating, having a warning screen like this certainly did raise some eyebrows.

However not far into the game, it was clear as to why they had to cover their bases in this way.

As always for a Call of Duty title, the opening cinematics are stunning to watch, but more importantly draw you into the story beautifully. The game picks up five years after the previous game as the global conflict continues with Russia, the United States of America, the Middle East and Europe involved in an escalating war. The story plays out like a Michael Bay film on steroids, filling the screen with explosions, military jargon, weapons of mass destruction and giant robots that can turn into cars. No wait, ignore that last one. But expect sweeping musical scores and pyrotechnics galore. Perhaps they have become a tad formulaic but there was no doubt that after them I wanted to grab a gun and start shooting at stuff.

Which is exactly what the game lets you do. The first mission plays out like a tutorial placing you in an army base in the Middle East. It runs you through a series of objectives that let you practice your shooting, perfect grenade throwing and then ultimately run an obstacle course where your skills are put to the test. Ingeniously, your performance here with regards to your time and accuracy determines the game’s difficulty level for future missions. The shear level of detail, even in these early stages of the game indicates just how much care Infinity Ward have taken with the visuals. Soliders are playing b-ball in the distance, drill sergeants will be screaming down the obstacle course and planes or helicopters will pan the skies above you. This is due to an updated game engine from the previous Call of Duty 4 that can accommodate for larger worlds and enhanced graphic detail.

As soon as you have learnt the basics, Modern Warfare 2 wastes no time in throwing you deep into the action. Immediately you’ll find yourself shipped out to the frontline in a city under siege in the Middle East. Surrounded by team-mates falling all around you, bullets ricocheting off destroyed cars and the enemy holding the high ground you realise that your gun is suddenly your new best friend. In this same area you and your men will be driving through the narrow streets of a crumbling, dusty city in a hum-vee where (you guessed it) all Hell breaks loose. You’ll be chasing terrorists through ally-ways, checking the classrooms of a school for snipers and avoiding scurrying civilians. It’s an adrenaline pumping experience and all within the first fifteen minutes of play!

But this is nothing compared to where Modern Warfare 2 takes you next. The beauty of the game lies in the fact that each mission is completely different to the next. As in previous Call of Duty games, each one is from the point of view from various soldiers from different parts of the world involved in the conflict. It means that one minute you could be in the snowy mountains of Kazakhstan, climbing up perilous cliffs with ice picks before making a bullet-ridden escape via a snow-mobile. Next mission you’ll find yourself in Rio de Janeiro, leaping from roof-tops and pursing an informant through markets and street football games. Later you’ll be storming a massive oil rig by sea, making stealth kills and avoiding apache helicopter fire. Moving on you’ll be in middle-class American suburbia in what feels like a scene from the movie “Red Dawn”, watching Russians parachute into fast-food joints in an all out siege. The pace of the action is relentless, diverse and extremely effective.

Modern Warfare 2 isn’t just about a frantic shooting experience though. Often the game will throw in slower paced moments to ensure that player’s haven’t become hypnotised by the pretty explosions. In fact, it is one mission in particular that challenges your moral and emotional sensibilities and is also the one that has triggered the media hubbub of late.

In order to infiltrate a terrorist organisation, players take control of a CIA agent who goes undercover to learn more about their terrorist leader, Vladimir Makarov. However this same outfit attacks a Russian airport and the mission that plays out here puts the player in an uncomfortable, disturbingly violent situation that may offend or upset some players. The controversy surrounding shooting innocent civilians is justified in a lot of ways. With Modern Warfare 2’s outstandingly realistic graphics, few would help feel a twinge of remorse when mowing down the dozens of unarmed bystanders. Especially considering you’ll see people screaming, trying to crawl away to safety or going to help one another and risk getting shot themselves. However the game does present an important aspect to the setting of the story. War isn’t just about racking up hundreds of kills with no consequences. This sequence shows the gritty, ruthless and horribly unfortunate reality of modern day warfare and the use of terrorism to strike at the heart of a nation.

It is also important to note here that the game does not “encourage” players to shoot down innocent civilians. Sure, it doesn’t penalise you either. But player’s can attempt to lessen the impact by aiming for the legs for a non-lethal shot that puts them out of danger or even just shoot at thin-air. The illusion of looking like a terrorist (in order to avoid being found out as a CIA spy) can be played out without the actual need to do any killing. Despite this though, there is little doubt that the end result could definitely be troubling to some – in which case you would be wise to skip these scenes. It is important to note though that there is a clever twist at the end of this mission to those who can wince their way through it.

Actual gameplay complaints for the game are very few and far between. Although the sound and music in the game are absolutely flawless, one criticism lies in the strangely limited audio options. Most games have a volume setting for music, sound effects and voice / commentary. Yet in Modern Warfare 2, there is just one generic volume meter which does seem a tad pointless considering the TV remote would do the same thing. It is also a shame considering how often your directions and objectives will be said by a commanding officer and they can be difficult to hear with all of the background noise going on around you. The only other complaint is that although the enemy AI has been ramped up nicely, with bad guys taking cover and throwing grenades wisely, your team-mate intelligence doesn’t seem to match. Often you will be flanked by enemies that your team-mates have failed to see, or even worse will just let them run straight past. I’m pretty certain I haven’t seen a friendly throw a grenade at the enemy either. This all sounds worse than it is though as in actuality, this glitch happens very rarely. I’m just trying to play devil’s advocate on a game that is near perfect.

With Call of Duty 4 clocking up thousands of hours online, it only stands to reason that Modern Warfare 2 would offer a similar multiplayer component. In fact the game has a crazy fourteen multiplayer modes and even adds a new feature perfect for those not wanting to venture into a frag frenzy of deathmatch known as Spec Ops. Spec Ops is a co-operative multiplayer mode that allows two players (either split screen, system link or online) to play through some of the more memorable missions taken from both the new campaign and some favourites from the first Modern Warfare too.

The other multiplayer modes cover the standards with Capture The Flag, Team Deathmatch, the bomb-planting/bomb-defusing Demolition and the base capturing Domination all included. One of the better team-based modes is called Headquarters Pro and involves a random series of capture points to be spawned throughout the round that teams must hold and defend for a set amount of time. With fourteen multiplayer modes across sixteen multiplayer maps, dozens of unlockable weapons and a seemingly never-ending set of ingame Challenges to try and beat, Modern Warfare 2 packs in a lot of multiplayer goodness. Infinity Ward have also spent time refining the hosting issues that tended to slow down the pace of the action for online gamers.

Overall this globe-spanning, action packed first person shooter is right on the money. It not only raises the bar for the quality we’ve come to expect from Call of Duty titles, it sets a new standard for the entire genre. The game constantly adds something new to the mix without straying too far from the traditional first-person shooter formula and is sure to be worth the wait for fans everywhere.

Finished the single player campaign yesterday(360. This is one amazing experince, it certainly goes where few games had ever dared to tread before. Frankly it leaves you feeling 'shell shocked' and comes as close as I can imagine a game coming to truely showing the ugliness of war. No doubt it will take out many GOTY awards. Highest production values ever, equal if not higher than those of Uncharted 2.

Also, felt a bit more time could have been spent on the multiplayer aspects -- no mention of additions such as death streak rewards, which help stop the game from sucking for not-so-good people like me? -- rather than spending paragraphs on the airport scene. It kind of just came across as if it were trying to justify the content to an outsider and it overshadowed the rest of the review. That's a shame, as the rest of the review was solid.

I finished the singleplayer mode yesterday. Best singleplayer FPS experience I've EVER had!! The undercover CIA mission didn't upset me at all. Think of it like watching a movie where the agent has to do exactly that.

Multiplayer is a great experience too. I knew that all those people whinging over no dedicated servers were crying for nothing, IW had something to replace it and I prefer the new system actually.

One question I'm wanted to know the answer to is: Say if I go to my parents house and play on my younger brothers computer. If I log into my Steam account there, I will gain access to my MW2 account correct?

I finished the game yesterday on my PS3 in "woosie" (easy) mode, which I do with all games I first play. I will now work my way up through the difficulty modes. I'm not a big fan of on-line multiplayer games, but I AM looking forward to playing this on my LAN system with my mates. I'm sure it will be a blast! Also looking forward to playing the SpecOps scenarios on two separate PS3s. I think it's a GREAT game and well worth the investment. By the way, Treyarch is working on COD7, which is reportedly breaking away from the WWII genre. If it's Call Of Duty, it's for me!! LOL!!

Ugh yet another high 9 review for this game. It's a ridiculously short single player followed by a nerfed multiplayer experience. The lack of Dedicated servers is pathetic, it didn't even manage to get rid of hacks, if you check out callofdutyhacks.com you can see that they already have some up. IWnet is f**kn useless, and the fact that they are banning mods on PC is just a sign that they want to cram DLC down your throat. Don't buy into it.

12 November 2009, 12:36 PMReply to ChiefHankI finished the game yesterday on my PS3 in "woosie" (easy) mode, which I do with all games I first play. I will now work my way up through the difficulty modes. I'm not a big fan of on-line multiplayer games, but I AM looking forward to playing this on my LAN system with my mates. I'm sure it will be a blast! Also looking forward to playing the SpecOps scenarios on two separate PS3s. I think it's a GREAT game and well worth the investment. By the way, Treyarch is working on COD7, which is reportedly breaking away from the WWII genre. If it's Call Of Duty, it's for me!! LOL!!

Because all those criticisms are related to the 360 version that was reviewed, right? Never mind the fact that NZGamer takes a console focus instead of a PC focus.

12 November 2009, 11:21 PMReply to DonuttaBecause all those criticisms are related to the 360 version that was reviewed, right? Never mind the fact that NZGamer takes a console focus instead of a PC focus.

"It not only raises the bar for the quality we’ve come to expect from Call of Duty titles, it sets a new standard for the entire genre."

Two questions:

1) What bar did it raise? When Call of Duty initially set out to respect the casualties of war in World War 2, where young men anonymously suffered to actually save the world from a true human evil, you instead got the A-Team (Hey, Soap looks like Mr. T!) rocking along to Eminem's latest single in this game. There is no A-Team in real life, but unless that's called raising the bar, hey, I wish the world all lived in Hollywood land.

2) What new standards did it raise for the entire genre? Artificial intelligence on the level of STALKER, FEAR, or Halo? Graphics on the level of Crysis (Or Killzone 2 for consoles)? Pacing on the level of the Half-Life games? Did Infinity Ward go above and beyond the call of duty to deliver gaming goodness to its PC community, who, by the way, made sure Call of Duty was a household franchise?

IW was right to try and drop the Call of Duty name from this game, because it's just not CoD anymore. "Call of Duty" originally sprung the idea that you, as a faceless citizen, must put your lives, and the lives of your friends, on the line, in a country you've never been to, in order to save the ones you love back home. That's the reality of World War 2. What's this game? "Call of Badassery". Let's shoot up millions of f**king Brazilians and Russians and then make a heroic jump towards the helicopter. Just keep that mohawk in check, right Soap?

"This sequence shows the gritty, ruthless and horribly unfortunate reality of modern day warfare and the use of terrorism to strike at the heart of a nation."

That airport mission? There was like four terrorists. You killed only several billion AOS/SWAT teams. Not only that, those dudes got into the airport with massive machine guns (did everyone forget about post 9/11 airport security). Where's the reality in that?

Worst of all, you could've killed the guy then and there. But for some honestly arbitrary reason, you're not supposed to kill him. "For the greater good". Pfff. That's the most contrived plot point I've seen in a video game. Controversy for the sake of controversy.
-
It ain't an attack on your review of the game, Angus. This just ain't the Call of Duty I once knew, nor was it created by the Infinity Ward I once admired. All for the quick buck, I guess.

"This sequence shows the gritty, ruthless and horribly unfortunate reality of modern day warfare and the use of terrorism to strike at the heart of a nation."

That airport mission? There was like four terrorists. You killed only several billion AOS/SWAT teams. Not only that, those dudes got into the airport with massive machine guns (did everyone forget about post 9/11 airport security). Where's the reality in that?

Worst of all, you could've killed the guy then and there. But for some honestly arbitrary reason, you're not supposed to kill him. "For the greater good". Pfff. That's the most contrived plot point I've seen in a video game. Controversy for the sake of controversy.
-
It ain't an attack on your review of the game, Angus. This just ain't the Call of Duty I once knew, nor was it created by the Infinity Ward I once admired. All for the quick buck, I guess.

Yeah I thought the same while playing it. It did seem weird. And then the dude you control gets shot instead, when you just had a good 15 minutes to take the bastard out.

"This sequence shows the gritty, ruthless and horribly unfortunate reality of modern day warfare and the use of terrorism to strike at the heart of a nation."

That airport mission? There was like four terrorists. You killed only several billion AOS/SWAT teams. Not only that, those dudes got into the airport with massive machine guns (did everyone forget about post 9/11 airport security). Where's the reality in that?

Worst of all, you could've killed the guy then and there. But for some honestly arbitrary reason, you're not supposed to kill him. "For the greater good". Pfff. That's the most contrived plot point I've seen in a video game. Controversy for the sake of controversy.
-
It ain't an attack on your review of the game, Angus. This just ain't the Call of Duty I once knew, nor was it created by the Infinity Ward I once admired. All for the quick buck, I guess.

I could comment on the wall of text pretension (which I find hard to swallow after you extolled the virtues of Bayonetta, of all things) but I just wanted to comment on this part:

"Worst of all, you could've killed the guy then and there. But for some honestly arbitrary reason, you're not supposed to kill him. "For the greater good". Pfff. That's the most contrived plot point I've seen in a video game. Controversy for the sake of controversy."

Either you haven't finished the game, or you're not as smart as you are trying to make yourself look. Why you didn't take such action is completely explained by the end of the game.

12 November 2009, 11:21 PMReply to DonuttaBecause all those criticisms are related to the 360 version that was reviewed, right? Never mind the fact that NZGamer takes a console focus instead of a PC focus.

Meh, keep crying about it. Your tears are delicious and hilarious.

Ok, let me just start by saying I bought the PS3 version of it, not for the PC, I got the pc one for free somehow. What I found on my ps3 anyways was that I couldn't play a single game online because the 'servers were overloaded'. Id normally excuse this but Infinity Ward hyped this as one of the biggest games of all time, and they didnt expect there to be lots of people playing its online, which they said was such a great improvement over it's predecessor? I guess it had a 'compelling' storyline, all 5-6 hours of it. Can't believe people ragged on ODST for being full priced when this is above and beyond that.

13 November 2009, 10:11 AMReply to DonuttaI could comment on the wall of text pretension (which I find hard to swallow after you extolled the virtues of Bayonetta, of all things) but I just wanted to comment on this part:

"Worst of all, you could've killed the guy then and there. But for some honestly arbitrary reason, you're not supposed to kill him. "For the greater good". Pfff. That's the most contrived plot point I've seen in a video game. Controversy for the sake of controversy."

Either you haven't finished the game, or you're not as smart as you are trying to make yourself look. Why you didn't take such action is completely explained by the end of the game.

Comment on my pretension. I really want someone to prove to me I'm wrong about Infinity Ward. No, I haven't finished the campaign. I'm halfway through my sneeze, but when I reach for the tissue pape the credits will probably start rolling. I'm sure insults on my person by way of Bayonetta and the questioning of my intelligence will surely help the argument at hand though.

But just for the sake of love and war, I will finish the game. By tonight. And I will probably come the conclusion that many across the internet have reported that the level is meant for nothing but to make your blood boil about Makarov.

Now I'm probably not as smart as you when it comes to stuff like this, but could you clarify this for me: would Russia really go f**king ape nuts when ONE undercover CIA agent is found at a terrorist massacre? Wouldn't the American government do anything under its power to tell Russian government everything of what happened? No. Apparently, Russia would rather not listen to reason even if Makarov, a former associate of Zakhaev (who was a former enemy of Russia), was behind it all.

Think about this: if an American was found at a massacre on Russian soil, would the Russians be on American turf by no later than tomorrow? Hell no. No one wants war. No one but Infinity Ward, that is. So I dunno how Makarov did it, really. Maybe he had some pixie dust or something to help him along the way.

Anyway no, comment on my pretension. I would really like someone to give me a valid reason as to why Modern Warfare 2 rocks socks, changes the genre, and places itself amongst the greatest games of all time. Actually scratch the last one, and just start off with how it places itself amongst the best of the CoD titles.

Played the SP on PC
Started on Hardened for my first play.
finished it in no time.

I agree, SP is good.
But MP is f**ked for PC, they have tried to make PC like some stupid Console?

Im sorry id rather have the better options i have with MW1, such as Server List, Console and yes Dedicated servers!

The things we took for granted as a PC player has been taken away, for something that compares to that of a console, which is utter crap.
How is this better? i hear the lag gets so bad that it skips every second, youtube IWNet MW2 Lag and watch the fail IW has produced.

This game was a console to PC port, and a bad one at that.
We get sh*t Multiplayer works, we have to use steam, of all things =< we have NO lean, none, at all.... why? why get rid of it? because its a port that's why.

Dedicated servers are better.
Why? because we choose the things we want. we can have mods. custom maps. A LOT more custom options for each server, nothing chosen by the console teat suckers Infinity Ward

Why replace a Multiplayer system that was perfect? ive never ever heard of anyone complaining about the old system, but ive heard thousands, infact houndreds of thousands of crys to (atleast) get dedicated servers back, and that the new system is utter sh*t.

We dont want to play on a console style system.
we want what we have had since the early days of FPS MP gaming.

hmmm... interesting read. Im just surprised there wasnt as many criticisms as id thought.... as its got a 4.9 (out of 10) based on 528 User Votes on metacritic with almost perfect scores by publications. Played through the campaign on PC today seems like more of the same.... some people love that but i was a cynic of the first game so not really seeing it. Shame itll never go platnium (even though its sold enough) otherwise i might buy a copy.

So I finished the campaign. Errm.... what the hell? All I saw was a million red herrings and a thorough convolution of the plot. Not only that, it didn't explain the massacre at all. Sure, it sets off events and ambitions, but it's just so bloody contrived and totally avoidable it comes off as weak. It just seems like it was there for the sake of controversy.

13 November 2009, 10:12 PMReply to ChatterboxZombieSince when did NZ become so patriotic?

since the all blacks started winning again and we magically became allright at soccer so we have standing in the world..... im pretty sure the all black flag is owned by people more than the actual one

14 November 2009, 06:55 AMReply to chinaman71since the all blacks started winning again and we magically became allright at soccer so we have standing in the world..... im pretty sure the all black flag is owned by people more than the actual one

13 November 2009, 09:21 PMReply to tnzkSo I finished the campaign. Errm.... what the hell? All I saw was a million red herrings and a thorough convolution of the plot. Not only that, it didn't explain the massacre at all. Sure, it sets off events and ambitions, but it's just so bloody contrived and totally avoidable it comes off as weak. It just seems like it was there for the sake of controversy.

Well with this and your other comments it's clear that you didn't pay attention or didn't understand the Modern Warfare story (both games). So why comment on them as if you are criticising when you are merely highlighting the gaps in your own knowledge?

A quick run down: Zakhaev was NOT an enemy of Russia per se. He was Russian politician (as well as warlord), and his goal was to return Russia to the Soviet Union. The whole Middle East segments were actually a red herring in order to distract the Americans from what was actually going on. That's why Al-Asad wasn't even in the city, and why he was happy to let the bomb go off.

When Zakhaev was killed, Makarov, his second-in-command, extolled Zakhaev's values until he was considered a hero. His execution by the Allied forces immediately painted them as public enemy number one, and that is explained at the start of the game.

Now, Shepherd was in control of the American invasion against Al-Asad and he lost 30,000 soldiers in that and, in his words, no one cared. So, he actually engineered the airport massacre so Russia would invade. By invading, he would make sure he would have "no shortage of patriots," he would win the war against Russia, and he would "rewrite history" to make himself a hero. The story is left open at the end, obviously for Modern Warfare 3, but to anyone paying attention and listening to all the dialogue during the game, the events of two are at least spelled out. All that remains is to find out what will happen to Price and Soap, who are on the run, and what will happen with Makarov.

As for the war thing, I think you completely missed the point on that one. It was the purest analogy to the US-led invasions I can think of. A terrorist attack occurs, evidence can lay it on the shoulders of citizens of a particular country, so the attacked retaliate. That is exactly what America did. The power in this game comes from the fact that you are running round the streets of America going "Dirty Russians! I'll teach you to invade my country!" only to then realise that this is EXACTLY what America just did to Afghanistan and Iraq. The sheer interactivity of the game reinforced this powerful message.

Of course, I can't be bothered any more. The fact you went off on a tirade before even finishing the game, along with your comments about PC gamers, proves that you just have some kind of beef against this game. Why did you even buy it?

And for the record, PC gamers didn't make Call of Duty a household name. I hadn't even heard about it until 2 came out on the 360, and it was definitely the success of 4 on the consoles that sent the series into the stratosphere.

Im so going to buy this as soon as exams are over, quick question: I can get a free game but i can't decide between cod5 or halo 3:odst, I dont have a next gen cod or halo yet what is a better option as i have all of halo 3's offline achievements. But i cant wait for this game !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

14 November 2009, 11:36 AMReply to DonuttaWell with this and your other comments it's clear that you didn't pay attention or didn't understand the Modern Warfare story (both games). So why comment on them as if you are criticising when you are merely highlighting the gaps in your own knowledge?

A quick run down: Zakhaev was NOT an enemy of Russia per se. He was Russian politician (as well as warlord), and his goal was to return Russia to the Soviet Union. The whole Middle East segments were actually a red herring in order to distract the Americans from what was actually going on. That's why Al-Asad wasn't even in the city, and why he was happy to let the bomb go off.

When Zakhaev was killed, Makarov, his second-in-command, extolled Zakhaev's values until he was considered a hero. His execution by the Allied forces immediately painted them as public enemy number one, and that is explained at the start of the game.

Now, Shepherd was in control of the American invasion against Al-Asad and he lost 30,000 soldiers in that and, in his words, no one cared. So, he actually engineered the airport massacre so Russia would invade. By invading, he would make sure he would have "no shortage of patriots," he would win the war against Russia, and he would "rewrite history" to make himself a hero. The story is left open at the end, obviously for Modern Warfare 3, but to anyone paying attention and listening to all the dialogue during the game, the events of two are at least spelled out. All that remains is to find out what will happen to Price and Soap, who are on the run, and what will happen with Makarov.

As for the war thing, I think you completely missed the point on that one. It was the purest analogy to the US-led invasions I can think of. A terrorist attack occurs, evidence can lay it on the shoulders of citizens of a particular country, so the attacked retaliate. That is exactly what America did. The power in this game comes from the fact that you are running round the streets of America going "Dirty Russians! I'll teach you to invade my country!" only to then realise that this is EXACTLY what America just did to Afghanistan and Iraq. The sheer interactivity of the game reinforced this powerful message.

Of course, I can't be bothered any more. The fact you went off on a tirade before even finishing the game, along with your comments about PC gamers, proves that you just have some kind of beef against this game. Why did you even buy it?

And for the record, PC gamers didn't make Call of Duty a household name. I hadn't even heard about it until 2 came out on the 360, and it was definitely the success of 4 on the consoles that sent the series into the stratosphere.

Trying to play with semantics here ain't gonna help. Zakhaev was clearly a terrorist, and is made out to be an enemy of the Russian government. It's about as good calling him a politician as it is calling Hitler a politician, or Stalin. It's technically true, but it's not the point, and everyone knows it.

I don't know how a criminal warlord becomes a national hero (any Neo Nazis successfully got a nation supporting Hitler yet?), but okay, so we believe it for the sake of the story, no matter how contrived. Four guys enter an airport in a post 9/11 era, and three get away just like that...
... I've just been discussing the story with some friends and apparently it's never explained, only implied through the loading screens at the end of the game. Well, I missed it, but from what's been said, there's no explanation. It's just said to happen and you gotta believe it. That's completely weak to be honest, and it's funny how ever since the first Modern Warfare, sh*t happens because someone gets mad over something. Zakhaev over his son, Shepherd over his troops. If modern warfare is a battle of emotions, I feel sorry for this world.

No, the airport massacre was not the purest analogy for western invasions. You want a proper commentary, watch the recently released "In The Loop". Not a drop of blood in that film and yet it made its message clear. You see, nothing was made of that airport massacre. The spectacle was killing the Russians. It was a five minute sequence. The invasion of America? It was brushed over in five seconds through the loading screen. Not only that, the analogy is so short-sighted it's not even funny. Yeah, we're asking the U.S to pull out of the Middle East, but none of it started in 2003. It's several decades in the making, and there are proper justifications as to why they can't just pull out. Modern Warfare 2? None of that political brewing. They found one American in a massacre, and Russia leads an entire force towards the most powerful country in the world the second they could. Short sighted, contrived, and just plain bullsh*t. There's a reason MW2 has been knocked on for its muddled and ridiculous plot from major gaming publications. It's just the stuff of geopolitical fantasy.

I don't need to know the game inside-out to form a justifiable opinion. Would you need to know how to sing to make a comment on someone's singing capabilities? You already know William Hung is a crap singer from just one video, right?

You're welcome to stop, but the thing is, I'm still unconvinced about how my pretension about this game is unjustifiable. The Call of Duty series was known for its all-round package, not if the story was silly or not.

-

Oh and believe it, PC gamers started the beast. You only heard of Call of Duty 2 when the 360 came out? Note the "2" at the end of the name. Know what a game needs to warrant a sequel (especially from Activision)? Sales. CoD was in the top ten best selling PC games of 2003 and 2004, which kept it in competition with Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 (and if you hadn't heard about those games, I'll let you know now that due to their history, they were sold in the millions). A GOTY edition later, an expansion pack, and action figure line later, and yeah.... it's totally not a well known franchise.

Donutta, you're a good guy and everything, but though you didn't even know it existed, I'm pretty sure the several million others who bought the 70+ GOTY award winner back in 2003/4 can vouch for the fact that it was a household name before Modern Warfare. Hey, it's had more sequels than Halo now, hasn't it?

14 November 2009, 06:42 PMReply to BlinKWithout the PC gamers support from Day 1 COD would never of made it to the 360.

Microsoft seen that cod was f**king awesome and asked it to be a lead title for when the xbox was released.

Thank PC for making the game what it is today, because we lit the light that started the whole series.

Hey bro, the Witcher is gonna hit the consoles soon, and before you know it, this series is going to get wasted too. And the console players will be all like "Yeah, we made the game what it is today so you can kiss our ass PC snobs".

Then the next one will be Crysis. "The original Crysis is only graphics. Crysis 2, 3 and 4 the effing best games ever", shout the console players as they play through incredibly linear paths, dumb A.I, preconceived vehicle sections, and a completely stripped down multiplayer which is nothing like the refreshing Crysis Wars.

"I don't need to know the game inside-out to form a justifiable opinion."

Your credibility went out the window with that comment. If you were to try that line of reasoning at an academic level, you would be laughed at for the rest of your life.

"Hey, there's the dude that tried to write criticism on Hamlet after only reading Act 1!"

Of course you need to know a work inside out before making justifiable comments on it. But of course, after reading your comments in this article, I realise that you write a lot but don't say anything at all. Verbosity does not equal intelligence, sorry.

As I said, you've thrown all your credibility out the window, so I'm done here.

y is it that there is always nerds trying 2 put down other nerds on game forums. gzzzzzz nerds take games wayyyyyyyy 2 seriously...... go play basketball or sumthing. dude ur ranked number 11 thats a sign that u need to do sumthing better with ur time. ur only on the planet once..... games are entertainment for rainy days and cold nights.. gosh noobs shoulnt tak things so seriously

15 November 2009, 03:06 PMReply to Croxleyy is it that there is always nerds trying 2 put down other nerds on game forums. gzzzzzz nerds take games wayyyyyyyy 2 seriously...... go play basketball or sumthing. dude ur ranked number 11 thats a sign that u need to do sumthing better with ur time. ur only on the planet once..... games are entertainment for rainy days and cold nights.. gosh noobs shoulnt tak things so seriously

15 November 2009, 05:37 PMReply to DeanologyWaiting for the price to drop.

lol your going to have to wait for about hmm.... 2 years? COD4 achieved 'platinum sales' on PS3 very fast but because activison are stingy bastards its still $100 at most retailers. Why drop the price if the 360 keeps its A games at full price?

I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want! I want!

Single player was really good BUT really short!
needs to be twice as long for me to say that it was actually good. (compare the length of storyline in this game to Resistance: Fall of Man" and you will wonder wtf codmw2 was thinking with this short ass storyline

15 November 2009, 01:13 AMReply to tnzkTrying to play with semantics here ain't gonna help. Zakhaev was clearly a terrorist, and is made out to be an enemy of the Russian government. It's about as good calling him a politician as it is calling Hitler a politician, or Stalin. It's technically true, but it's not the point, and everyone knows it.

I don't know how a criminal warlord becomes a national hero (any Neo Nazis successfully got a nation supporting Hitler yet?), but okay, so we believe it for the sake of the story, no matter how contrived. Four guys enter an airport in a post 9/11 era, and three get away just like that...
... I've just been discussing the story with some friends and apparently it's never explained, only implied through the loading screens at the end of the game. Well, I missed it, but from what's been said, there's no explanation. It's just said to happen and you gotta believe it. That's completely weak to be honest, and it's funny how ever since the first Modern Warfare, sh*t happens because someone gets mad over something. Zakhaev over his son, Shepherd over his troops. If modern warfare is a battle of emotions, I feel sorry for this world.

No, the airport massacre was not the purest analogy for western invasions. You want a proper commentary, watch the recently released "In The Loop". Not a drop of blood in that film and yet it made its message clear. You see, nothing was made of that airport massacre. The spectacle was killing the Russians. It was a five minute sequence. The invasion of America? It was brushed over in five seconds through the loading screen. Not only that, the analogy is so short-sighted it's not even funny. Yeah, we're asking the U.S to pull out of the Middle East, but none of it started in 2003. It's several decades in the making, and there are proper justifications as to why they can't just pull out. Modern Warfare 2? None of that political brewing. They found one American in a massacre, and Russia leads an entire force towards the most powerful country in the world the second they could. Short sighted, contrived, and just plain bullsh*t. There's a reason MW2 has been knocked on for its muddled and ridiculous plot from major gaming publications. It's just the stuff of geopolitical fantasy.

I don't need to know the game inside-out to form a justifiable opinion. Would you need to know how to sing to make a comment on someone's singing capabilities? You already know William Hung is a crap singer from just one video, right?

You're welcome to stop, but the thing is, I'm still unconvinced about how my pretension about this game is unjustifiable. The Call of Duty series was known for its all-round package, not if the story was silly or not.

-

Oh and believe it, PC gamers started the beast. You only heard of Call of Duty 2 when the 360 came out? Note the "2" at the end of the name. Know what a game needs to warrant a sequel (especially from Activision)? Sales. CoD was in the top ten best selling PC games of 2003 and 2004, which kept it in competition with Doom 3 and Half-Life 2 (and if you hadn't heard about those games, I'll let you know now that due to their history, they were sold in the millions). A GOTY edition later, an expansion pack, and action figure line later, and yeah.... it's totally not a well known franchise.

Donutta, you're a good guy and everything, but though you didn't even know it existed, I'm pretty sure the several million others who bought the 70+ GOTY award winner back in 2003/4 can vouch for the fact that it was a household name before Modern Warfare. Hey, it's had more sequels than Halo now, hasn't it?